Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I defend Oak Park because it is often the subject of unfair attacks. For example:
Myth: Oak Park is dangerous, and it is only a matter of time before it is gobbled up by Austin.
Truth: Oak Park does have higher property crime than many other suburbs that are as "well off", but violent crime is incredibly rare and crime rates have steadily declined since the 1980's. The village is remarkably stable, and seems to be increasing in desirability.
Myth: Liberals in Oak Park have jacked up taxes to the point that businesses are leaving in droves.
Truth: Real estate taxes in Oak Park are indeed high, and certain types of businesses have closed or left, like car dealerships crammed on to small obsolete lots--but this is happening all over the near western suburbs as sprawl has driven west. Other recently-closed businesses were old mom and pops with limited appeal in today's world, like a menswear shop. Over all, Oak Park has a very nice mix of businesses compared to most other suburbs. The attrition rate isn't much higher than in other suburbs. Chet pointed to how North Avenue is in decline, yet Roosevelt Road has seen obvious improvement in recent years. The catchment area for Oak Park businesses has probably shrunk since the 1960s as the Austin Neighborhood and some surrounding suburbs have declined, so I don't think you'll see the big regional draws in the village, but the nice mix of small local shops and restaurants will likely always be there.
Myth: The schools in Oak Park are in decline.
Truth: The decline in test scores in some Oak Park schools has more to do with the mix of students at the school, and has nothing to do with a decline in educational quality. When you break down the test scores by subgroups, schools like OPRF continue to be among the best in the western suburbs. And most of the D97 elementary schools have seen improved test scores over the last five years.
Well said LK. I find myself continuing on these conversations to counter the perpetuated myths and distortions. I find it hypocritical when Chet criticizes Oak Parkers for turning away from issues in the village while only focusing on the positives (Truth: most Oak Parkers I know are very vocal and honest about the issues the village contends with, but also acknowledge the positives) when he cannot find anything by praise to sing about his own slice of "heaven".
Oakparkdude and Bru67 also being up excellent points about the village, and the schools. Bru67's comparison is very useful.
Last edited by chitownperson; 03-13-2014 at 01:51 PM..
I made several rather begnign lists of some of the things that I like / dislike about Oak Park culminating in this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chet everett
I can certainly see how some of the things that LK mentions are a factor -- folks that don't dig terribly deeply into the real similarities / differences of the various options that include finding a decent spot inside Chicago to start a family vs heading to a suburb has been "a thing" since probably longer back than any of us here can relate to -- while certainly the "boom" following WWII is a big factor that does not completely address the history of how / why towns that border Chicago were effective in maintaining their independence while some areas that could have been separate towns were swallowed up by Chicago.
There is no shortage of options for folks that wish to have a pleasant family untethered to a minivan in a wide range of neighborhoods inside Chicago as well as a suprisingly large number of suburbs that stretch out along the spokes of our very used Metra commuter rail system.
I do agree that each town in the region, as well as many city neighborhoods, do have some reputation of unique character. That said the degree to which these things are true vs something closer to stereotype / myth is open for debate. It is worth noting that certain kinds of people do tend to "buy in" the prevailing assumptions of places and it is often helpful in such cases to track the degree to which such folks subsequently become disappointed with reality failing to match the myth...
Would any sane person see anything particularly hostile / distorted in this?
Of course when the cages get rattled and folks start coming out with utter falsehood then I do double down on efforts to set the record straight. When it comes to travesty of a place purporting to be some mecca for non-majority families to educate their kids really being a place where decades of subpar achievement have been institutionallized failing to elict any praise for the other nice things that the village has going for it, that would be like a reporter writing about George Wallace blocking the doors to the University of Alabama and mentioning what a nicely pressed suit he had on.
I don't pretend that there is any magic place where kids that have been struggling academically will soar to the top of the class but the FACTS as stated in the lengthy report that I linked to from OPRF itself show that EVEN adjusting for low income and for kids they spent their entire life in Oak Park, going through the supposedly good feeder schools they are still a BIG PART of the performance gap. IT IS NOT kids moving in after wasting time in inferior CPS schools, it is not just a function of economic issues. The bottomline is that MANY DECADES of policies aimed at supposedly keeping a "racial balance" have had the the unintended consequence of perpuating attitudes that reinforce the performance gap. That is a TERRIBLE thing and folks that try to defend it or turn the question into "well about places" are missing the point -- nobody is saying another costly town is some kind special nirvana of harmony. Folks that make the sacriifices to live in an otherwise not-so-economically diverse area are kind of like immigrants that leave behind their "homeland" and invest in the future of their kids getting a top notch education. The sad thing is there are just too few folks willing to really committ to such a radical step.
Last edited by chet everett; 03-13-2014 at 03:33 PM..
The bottomline is that MANY DECADES of policies aimed at supposedly keeping a "racial balance" have had the the unintended consequence of perpuating attitudes that reinforce the performance gap. That is a TERRIBLE thing and folks that try to defend it or turn the question into "well about places" are missing the point.
You really don't have any evidence of this, and as oakparkdude and BRU67 pointed out, the "achievement gap" really hasn't been solved in any suburban high school system anywhere. The fact that D181 in Hinsdale has a slightly better (but still bad) record of low-income student performance is hardly reason to celebrate, especially when you look at the fact that the district has an INCREDIBLY low percentage of students who fit this profile (3%). That's hardly a solution that will "scale up" with any effect on a larger student population.
Oak Park is at least throwing resources at the achievement gap problem. Are they barking up the wrong tree? It does appear so, but their efforts are still more than most districts are trying. If Hinsdale 181 is the model we should aspire to, the solution appears to be "educate fewer low-income students".
As I said repeatedly now this thread is about "what do you love / hate about Oak Park"
If someone is offended by the hypocrisy of things like "well at least they try" when I point out that "trying" is clearly not working -- the performance gap has shown NO reduction despite DECADES of "trying". The reason for this is that folks have not just broken their own arms patting themselves on the back for being "so welcoming" but their efforts at steering folks toward places to live based in pigmentation have created a culture that does not really attempt to solve the acheivement gap as much as try to make other feel better about accepting it.
I have not made any claims that any other high school district does things differently largely becuase that would be "off topic" in this thread but I have tried, to a limited degree, explaining why "feeling welcomed" is not nearly as effective as seeking out a school where higher performance is the norm. This is not much different than leaving some crummy country that is lacking in opportunity and starting over in the US.
It's convenient to be selective of a few paragraphs and ignore the multitude of posts, not only current, but span back months and years. A quick search in the topics of Oak Park in City Data will undoubtedly provide plenty of examples.
You can accuse the vast majority of posters on here of uttering "falsehoods", and then pretend to be the voice of reality, all you like... But the fact remains that other posters have called you out on your "falsehoods" and "distortions", and I am far more willing to take them as voices of reason and reality, because they happen to have actual REAL experience living in Oak Park, have had generations of family that have LIVED THROUGH IT, and confirm my REAL experiences living here and other residents I've conversed with.
You talk about "subpar achievement" as being institutionalized, which is the low income minority students I suppose you refer to (as the majority are high achievers)... Which brings me to Bru's comparison which is important because the minority students in D181 being only 3%, do slightly better, also with a higher $ number per minority student (historically, the greater number of low income students per school will affect the over all achievement of that student body, and we could go to town on all the social, political, economic factors that goes into that). I too would like to see how well Hinsdale schools would do be bring the number of income minority students up to the 20s, 30s, 40s...
You say; "The bottomline is that MANY DECADES of policies aimed at supposedly keeping a "racial balance" have had the the unintended consequence of perpuating attitudes that reinforce the performance gap." Things like the Oak PArk strategy, creation of mixed income housing, have allowed many low income minorities to stay in the village, and the challenges with the gap as a result (as with the national issue we face), but saying that it is "perpuating attitudes that reinforce the performance gap" is nothing but divisive nonsense, and the fact that someone would call these initiatives a "TERRIBLE thing", speaks for itself. Also, the assumption that the minorities in Hinsdale schools leaving their "homeland" for a better life by making sacrifices (Are you talking about the 2% of blacks at Hinsdale Central?) is condescending, because in this context it insinuates that minorities in Oak Park are not making sacrifices for a better life, and that they are merely living off entitlements without working hard... How would you know!
Last edited by chitownperson; 03-13-2014 at 04:48 PM..
Again, what is the point of deliberating "hording" HUD Sec 8 vouchers if there is no real advantage to people living in Oak Park vs other area where either they would get more space for the same rent OR have access to a community that will result in better long term outcomes for their families?
If you look at say Homewood-Flossmoor high school the performance numbers for minority students are considerably better than OPRF, and that school has just 25% students of the national majority race. Has anyone "steered" folks around that town?
What do low income voucher residents get when they leave some poor and violent area of Chicago for Oak Park? Let's see, they get a safe community, housing that's in a mixed income property where the opposability of integration (as oppose to feeling segregated in an all low income project) is possible, greater public services, a more pleasant overall environment, they get a chance at a school with great educators (again, it looks that no school around Chicagoland has the magic bullet for the gap, uniformly affluent suburbs included), park districts programs, the possibility of pre-k programs, programs in the public libraries, a social atmosphere with a lot of people that are "different" in some way (which makes a difference, whether you believe it or not) etc... Are you insinuating that Hinsdale is unable to attain sec 8 voucher opportunities? Or that it's better not to provide them?
You are now comparing an area with a greater amount of affluent and middle class blacks to a place with less. What do you expect?
Last edited by chitownperson; 03-13-2014 at 05:18 PM..
What do low income voucher residents get when they leave some poor and violent area of Chicago for Oak Park? Let's see, they get a safe community, housing that's in a mixed income property where the opposability of integration (as oppose to feeling segregated in an all low income project) is possible, they get a chance at a school with great educators (again, it looks that no school around Chicagoland has the magic bullet for the gap), park districts programs, the possibility of pre-k programs, programs in the public libraries, a social atmosphere with a lot of people that are "different" in some way (which makes a difference, whether you believe it or not) etc...
You are now comparing an area with a greater amount of affluent and middle class blacks to a place with less. What do you expect?
All I am pointing out is that the policies that so many supporters of Oak Park seem so eager to congratulate themselves about (never mind that they were instituted decades ago and likely were not even needed as they came after Federal regulations outlawed discriminatory real estate activities...) have resulted in a town that has a worse performance gap than a town with no such policies. On balance Flossmoor is probably not more costly to live in that Oak Park and the percentage of low income students is slightly larger down south -- OPRF 22.9% vs HF 23.6% I am sure that census data would show there are not really any major differences between how many more affluent minorities in either town but this exchange again illustrates how ready the supporters of Oak Park are to change the subject when an uncomfortable truth is revealed...
All I am pointing out is that the policies that so many supporters of Oak Park seem so eager to congratulate themselves about (never mind that they were instituted decades ago and likely were not even needed as they came after Federal regulations outlawed discriminatory real estate activities...
Not even needed????? Then why are there so few Chicagoland suburbs (and city neighborhoods) which have been stably integrated (i.e. significant black AND white populations) for decades?
The reason for this is that folks have not just broken their own arms patting themselves on the back for being "so welcoming" but their efforts at steering folks toward places to live based in pigmentation have created a culture that does not really attempt to solve the acheivement gap as much as try to make other feel better about accepting it.
I'm sorry Chet, but I just don't buy this. I might agree with you that the Oak Park Regional Housing Center hasn't really been effective and that OPRF hasn't found much success in closing the achievement gap. But I don't think either of these things can be blamed for making it worse.
It would be interesting if we could measure the effects of the Oak Park Regional Housing Center on Oak Park's segregation index, but I just don't think they've ever had the volume of customers to really have a major effect. To me it just seems like a bit of a silly endeavor with good intentions. I think you could attack the Center as a waste of money, but I don't see any way that it is part of a "culture" that is more interested in mutual back-patting than solving problems. And at the end of the day, I believe that the "good intentions" of Oak Parkers is the real reason that the village has more successfully integrated than many other suburbs in Chicagoland.
But I will concede this: If I were a low-income parent, I would take a close look at which school districts were doing the best job with low-income students, and D97/D200 are not really among those at this time in history. It would be interesting to see THAT type of school ranking in the Sun-Times…. Highest performance for low-income students.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let the record show...
